Republic of korea - Vietnam strategic cooperative partnership and the way forward in the new context of global governance change in the 21st century

BLIC OF KOREA-VIETNAM STRATEGIC COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIP AND THE WAY FORWARD IN THE NEW CONTEXT OF GLOBAL GOVERNANCE CHANGE IN THE 21 ST CENTURY Major : International Relations Index number : 62310206 DOCTORAL DISSERTATION SUPERVISOR: ASSOC.PROF.DR. NGUYEN THAI YEN HUONG HANOI – 2014 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS AFFIRMATION I affirm that this doctoral dissertation is the outcome of my own research and study. All the statistics and figures included in the dissertation are authentic and precise. All the findings have never been published in any other research study. AUTHOR PARK NOH WAN ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to express my deepest gratitude towards my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyen Thai Yen Huong for her instruction, support and encouragement during my research process. My sincere thanks are also due to teachers and staff at the Faculty of Post Graduate Study, Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, for offering me the most favorable conditions to complete my dissertation. Finally, I am grateful to all my family members, friends and colleagues for their support and encouragement. Hanoi, April 2014 Author Park Noh Wan TABLE OF CONTENTS AFFIRMATION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS LIST OF FIGURES PREFACE ........................................................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 1: GLOBAL GOVERNANCE CHANGES AND THEIR CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................................. 14 1.1. Global Governance: Definition and Framework ............................ 14 1.1.1. Global Governance: Definition and Analytical Usefulness of the Concept ................................................................................................... 14 1.1.2. Global Governance: Transition and Structure .............................. 16 1.2. Governance Structure Changes and Their Characteristics ........... 19 1.2.1. Structural Change Background: The End of the Cold War .......... 19 1.2.2. Characteristics of Recent Global Governance Change ................. 20 1.2.2.1. Transition into Multi-Polar System: Declining US and Rising China ................................................................................................... 20 1.2.2.2. Strengthening Regionalism: Expansion of Economic Blocks 24 1.2.2.3. Global Issues and Limitation of UN and G8 Roles ............... 27 1.3. Global Governance: Reshaping and Prospects ............................... 30 1.3.1. Possibility of Reshaping Global Governance ............................... 30 1.3.2. Reshaping Prospects of Global Governance ................................. 32 1.4. Regional Governance Change in East Asia ..................................... 34 1.4.1. General Overview ......................................................................... 34 1.4.2. Northeast Asia: Regional Cooperation and Change ..................... 35 1.4.3. Southeast Asia: Regional Cooperation and Change ..................... 37 1.5. Remarks .............................................................................................. 40 CHAPTER 2: ROK AND VIETNAM: POLICY RESPONSES TO GLOBAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNANCE CHANGE SINCE 1991 . 43 2.1. ROK and Vietnam: Responses to Global Governance Change ..... 43 2.1.1. Why it was Necessary for ROK and Vietnam to Respond ........... 43 2.1.2. ROK‟s Policy Responses .............................................................. 44 2.1.3. Vietnam‟s Policy Responses ......................................................... 48 2.2. Responses to the Global Economic Crisis on the Part of ROK and Vietnam ...................................................................................................... 52 2.2.1. Global Economic Crises and its Structural Trends ....................... 52 2.2.2. Policy Responses: ROK and Vietnam .......................................... 54 2.3. Responses to Regional Governance Change: ROK and Vietnam . 58 2.3.1. Rising China and Regional Governance Change .......................... 58 2.3.2. Responses of ROK and Vietnam to Regional Governance Change ..................................................................................................... 63 2.4. Remarks .............................................................................................. 67 CHAPTER 3: ROK-VIETNAM BILATERAL RELATIONS AND WAYS FORWARD IN THE CONTEXT OF REGIONAL AND GLOBAL GOVERNANCE CHANGE IN THE 21 st CENTURY ............................... 71 3.1. Overview of ROK-Vietnam Bilateral Relations .............................. 71 3.1.1. ROK-Vietnam Bilateral Relations Before 1992 ........................... 71 3.1.2. Development of ROK-Vietnam Relations since 1992 .................. 73 3.1.2.1. Politics and Foreign Affairs ................................................... 74 3.1.2.2. Economic Cooperation .......................................................... 77 3.1.2.3. Development Cooperation (ODA) ......................................... 84 3.1.2.4. Cultural and Social Cooperation ........................................... 87 3.2. Opportunities and Challenges in ROK-Vietnam Relations ........... 91 3.2.1. Opportunities in ROK- Vietnam Relations ................................... 91 3.2.2. Engines behind Rapidly Expanding Bilateral Relations ............... 94 3.2.3. Challenges in ROK-Vietnam Diplomatic Relations ..................... 96 3.2.3.1 Challenges with Regional and Global Dimensions ................ 97 3.2.3.2. Challenges in Bilateral Relations Dimension ..................... 105 3.3. Ways Forward for ROK-Vietnam Relations in the 21st Century 109 3.3.1. Strategic Cooperative Partnership: Ways Forward ..................... 109 3.3.2. General Principles ....................................................................... 112 3.3.3. Recommendations for Deepening Strategic Partnership ............ 115 3.3.3.1. For Trust-Building in Politics, Security and Diplomacy ..... 116 3.3.3.2. For Positive Response to US and Chinese Foreign Policies 118 3.3.3.3. For Strategic Cooperation in Trade and Economic Sector . 120 3.3.3.4. For Diplomatic Relations with North Korea ....................... 122 3.3.3.5. For Coordinative Response to the Emerging Global Issues 123 3.3.4. Remarks....................................................................................... 131 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 136 AUTHOR’S WORKS ................................................................................. 140 LIST OF REFERENCES ........................................................................... 141 LIST OF ACRONYMS AHF Agape Hospital Fellowship AKFTA ASEAN-ROK Free Trade Agreement APEC Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation ARF ASEAN Regional Forum ASEM Asia – Europe Meeting ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations BRICS Brazil, Russia, India, China and Republic of South Africa EAI East Asian Institute EPS Employment Permit System EU European Union FDI Foreign Direct Investment FEALAC Forum of East Asia-Latin America Cooperation FTA Free Trade Agreement G8 (group of most developed countries) US, UK, France, Germany, Italy, Canada, Japan, Russia G20 (group of twenty developed and developing countries) Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, ROK, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United Kingdom, US, and European Union GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade GNI Gross National Income IMF International Monetary Fund IPCCC International Panel Convention Climate Change IT Information Technology KAOVA Korea Agent Orange Veterans Association KFHI Korea Food for the Hungry International KITA Korea International Trade Association KSP Knowledge Sharing Programme KVFTA ROK - Vietnam Free Trade Agreement MDGs Millennium Development Goals MERCOSUR Common Market of South America NAFTA North America Free Trade Agreement NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization NGO Non-Governmental Organization ODA Official Development Assistance OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development PNTR Permanent Normal Trade Relations PPP Purchasing Power Parity RCEP Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnerships ROK Republic of Korea SCO Shanghai Cooperation Organization SOE State-owned Enterprise TTIP Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership TPP Trans-Pacific Partnership USA United States of America USD United States Dollar USSR Union of Soviet Socialist Republics UXO Unexploded Ordnance VAVA Vietnam Association of Victims of Agent Orange (Dioxin) WB World Bank WTO World Trade Organization LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: BRICS International Status and Future Prospects ........................... 24 Figure 2. Trans-Pacific Partnership Countries ................................................ 26 Figure 3: Proportional Size of ROK, Chinese, and Japanese Economies in the World ............................................................................................................... 36 Figure 4: ROK, China and Japan Trade Trends .............................................. 36 Figure 5: ROK, China and Japan Trade Ratio in World Trade ....................... 37 Figure 6: ASEAN GDP in the World .............................................................. 38 Figure 7: ASEAN members‟ GDP per capita (IMF 2012 estimates) .............. 38 Figure 8: Total ROK Trade Volume 1957-2011 .............................................. 47 Figure 9: Global GDP Growth (percent, quarter over quarter) ....................... 53 Figure 10: Vietnam‟s Economic Growth & Inflation 2002 - 2010 ................. 57 Figure 11: Government Debt and Government Guaranteed Public Debt ....... 58 Figure 12: ROK‟s Investment Trend in Vietnam ............................................ 78 Figure 13: Bilateral Trade and Investment Trend ........................................... 79 Figure 14: Top Ten Investing Countries in Vietnam ....................................... 80 Figure 15: Trend of Vietnam‟s Trade Balance with ROK ............................... 81 Figure 16: Vietnam's Share in ROK's Total Trade with ASEAN .................... 82 Figure 17: The Trend of Visitors to Vietnam .................................................. 88 Figure 18: Comparison of ROK, Japan and Singapore Links with Vietnam (2005-2013) ..................................................................................................... 93 Figure 19: ROK-Vietnam Trade Deficit Trend ............................................. 106 Figure 20: Energy and Oil Consumption Data .............................................. 124 Figure 21: Dependence on Foreign Resources, Oil Dependence on the Middle East ................................................................................................................ 124 Figure 22: Competing claims in the South China Sea .................................. 126 1 PREFACE 1. Introduction Since the end of the Cold War in 1991, regional and global governance have been changing rapidly. So, too, has the strategic cooperative partnership between Republic of Korea (hereafter referred to as ROK) and Vietnam. There are good reasons, therefore, to carry out an in–depth analysis of the evolving ROK-Vietnam relationship in its global setting. The world is now in the process of an unprecedented transition period. Many experts predict that the future world may shift into the “G-2 (the US and China) Era” or “the Energy- Climate Era.” [31, pp. 308]. Scholars like T. Friedman1, expect that the green and environmentally-friendly technology will play a key role in reshaping economic growth paradigms and creating national prosperity in the future. Likewise, in the post-Cold War period, the world has changed remarkably with rapid globalization. Globalization has played a pivotal role in increasing the total world GDP as well as in facilitating relationships among countries. The world has become more unified, and its system has also rapidly changed. Together with a rapid leap in economic growth in the emerging countries such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and Republic of South Africa), the global order and the international system are being newly 1 T. Friedman, – famous for his work on globalization, views, the future world as “Hot, Flat and Crowded”, that is to say, characterized by the three trends of global warming, middle class society and increasing of population, (from 6.7 billion in 2010 to 9.7 billion in 2050). A green revolution is the only strategy to preserve the continued existence of human kind as well as the leadership power and the role of the United States. 2 reshaped. In short, the relationships among powers which were created after World War II are being restructured. In the 21 st century, relationship adjustments among powers will be one of the main issues in world politics. This transition can be summarized under the following three points: i) structural change in socialist systems, ii) shifts in world power politics, and iii) changes in global actors‟ behavior. To be more specific, after the Cold War, the dissolution of the Soviet Union led to the collapse of the socialist bloc worldwide. As a result, the world changed from a bipolar to a uni-polar system, in which the United States became the leading state. Many countries then began to move from socialist planned economies to free market oriented ones, promoting the free exchange of goods and personnel. The tone of world politics, too, changed from Hard Power Politics –dominated by diplomatic, security and military issues to Soft Power Politics- focusing on economics and culture. International actors began to address global issues together through dialogue and friendly cooperation under the basic principle of promoting peace and stability, and also fostered a cooperative and unified spirit to deal with global issues. In this complicated environment, the global governance change has decisively, and in every aspect, influenced the development of ROK and Vietnam relations. Around the middle of the 1980s, ROK and Vietnam were under pressure to reshape and rejuvenate their foreign policies to swiftly adapt to the changing global order. They responded to the newly evolving structure of world order in a timely manner, proclaiming more reform oriented and open foreign policies to enhance their national interests in the 21 st century. 3 These policies contributed to promoting diplomatic normalization between the two countries in 1992, laying the groundwork for astonishing development in bilateral relations over the next twenty years. Working on this solid foundation, ROK and Vietnam need to draw up a new strategic cooperative framework. Vietnam aims to complete its industrialization and modernization by 2020, while ROK has a national goal to reunify the Korean peninsula. With these ideas as a background, this dissertation examines the two countries‟ foreign policies and their relations in all sectors. It also poses the question “What will be the next step forwards in ROK-Vietnam relations”? It then offers some proposals to re-coordinate each country‟s foreign policy in the coming years and to further develop their 2009 strategic cooperative partnership. Finally, the dissertation analyzes the present global governance mechanism established at the end of the World War II, surveys the distinctive characteristics of global governance change after the end of the Cold War, examines the responses of ROK and Vietnam to these changes, and then explores ways in which both countries can cooperate in the medium and long term periods in the 21 st century. 2. Literature review There have been many books, articles and research papers analyzing “global governance”. However, up to now, works examining the ROK- Vietnam Strategic Cooperative Partnership in the 21 st century in the new context of the global governance change have been lacking. The word “global governance” has come into use with the rapid globalization since the 1990s. Yet what exactly is “global governance”? Who governs the world? Both the 4 concept and the definition of “global governance” are rather vague. The Commission on Global Governance 2 defines its subject very generally as “the sum of the many ways in which individuals and institutions, public and private, manage their common affairs. It is a continuing process through which conflicting or diverse interests may be accommodated and cooperative action taken.”[45, pp.7-8] However, the meaning of the term varies, depending on the person employing it or the circumstances in which it is used. The term does not have a precise definition because there is really no a general consensus about its meaning [124]. Generally, “global governance” is a useful concept as a descriptive tool for international cooperation; however, it has its limitations as an analytic framework to explain the cause and effect relationship between cooperation and conflict. Authors like James Rosenau have also used “governance” to denote the regulation of interdependent relations in the absence of any overarching political authority, such as in the international system. From a slightly different perspective Robert Gilpin proposes Hegemonic Stability Theory (HST), arguing that the international system is more likely to remain stable when a single nation-state is the dominant world power, maintaining hegemony [33, pp. 107]. Regarding the global governance mechanism after the end of the Cold War, there are a number of views. Many people ask whether it will be possible to continue to keep the present world order in the 21st century. If it is possible, 2 The Commission was established in 1992 with the support of United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. 5 when and in what circumstances is eventual change likely? Who and which country can lead any future shift? Joseph Nye considers that the various and complex transnational connections and interdependencies between states and societies have been increasing, while the use of military force and power balancing is decreasing, although it still remains important [49, pp. 115]. The article by James Petras entitled “China: Rise, Fall, and Re-emergence as a Global Power” proposes a different view. China will replace the United States to become a leading world economic power over the next decade. However, China has seriously lagged behind the United States and Europe in building an aggressive war-making capacity. Nevertheless, the leadership in regulating world order is gradually shifting to the emerging countries. The article in the Financial Times entitled “The End of US hegemony: Legacy of 9/11” argues that while the United State still maintains overwhelming power, it no longer plays the role of hegemony [13]. Regarding the reform of the United Nations, Thomas G.Weiss, David P. Fasythe and Roger A. Coate in “The United Nations and Changing World Politics” take up three key issues: international peace and security; human rights and the growing influence of non-state actors; and sustainable development/eco-development. However, this work cannot provide a clear-cut answer to the main issues which the UN is now facing. The key issue of the UN is how to reform the UN Security Council. With accelerated globalization unprecedented global issues have arisen. A number of books, journals, and articles dealing with global issues such as climate change, poverty, terrorism, 6 and human rights, are now being published. Among them are the “UN International Panel Convention Climate Change (IPCCC) Report” and the “Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change” by Nicholas Stern. However, there are many coercive ways to address such global issues. As noted above, research on the ROK-Vietnam Strategic Cooperative Partnership has hitherto been limited. The Cold War prevented ROK and Vietnam from establishing normal relations and engaging in people to people exchange. Of course, ROK had good diplomatic relations with South Vietnam before Vietnam‟s unification by North Vietnam in 1974. Nevertheless, from the middle of the 1980s, both ROK and Vietnam began to exchange trade. The article by Do Hai Nam, Ngo Xuan Binh and Sung Yeul Koo in “Economic Cooperation between ROK and Vietnam in the Context of East Asian Integration” notes that, while their relations were inaugurated commercial during the second half of the 1980s, the ties remained limited to trade [3, pp. 419]. Around that time, ROK and Vietnam proclaimed new foreign policies to respond to the rapid changes in the international environment. ROK opened its “Northern Diplomacy,” while Vietnam adopted “Doi Moi (Reform and Open Door Policy)” in 1986. These two diplomatic policies provided the greatest impulse to strengthen ROK-Vietnam relations and bring them to their present state. In this regard, Alexander Lam Vuving “The Shaping of Foreign Policy: Vietnamese Grand Strategy after the Cold War” [115] sheds light on the reconstruction of Vietnamese diplomacy in the new world order. Charles 7 K. Armstrong‟s article entitled “South Korea‟s Northern Policy” 3, [10, pp. 35-45] examines the ROK‟s response, focusing on the importance of attached to dialogue and lessening tensions with North Korea and its communist allies. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations between ROK and Vietnam in 1992, numerous studies of bilateral ties have been published. Most focus on the development of economic and cultural, but not political relations. The article entitled “Vietnam-Korea Strategic Cooperative Partnership” in The “World and Vietnam magazine” in 2012 and the study by Do Hai Nam, Ngo Xuan Binh and Sung Yeul Koo in “Economic Cooperation between Vietnam and the Republic of Korea in the East Asian Integration,” both present new insights into the remarkable development of ROK-Vietnam relations over the last 20 years. These publications argue that the unprecedented development has occurred because both countries lie geographically in the “East Asian cultural region”, with its salient characteristics of patriotism, intelligence and skill, passion for study and industriousness in work. It was against this background that the two countries‟ relations were upgraded to “Strategic Cooperative Partnership” in 2009 from the “Comprehensive Cooperative Partnership” in 2001. However, there have been very few books which attempt to examine 3 The “Northern Policy" was the signature foreign policy of South Korean president Roh Tae-woo. The policy guided South Korean efforts to reach out to the traditional allies of North Korea, with the ultimate goal of normalized relations with the People's Republic of China and the Soviet Union, both to improve the South's economy and to leave the North so isolated that it would have no choice but to open itself up and reduce military tensions. 8 comprehensively “Vietnam-ROK strategic cooperative relations and their future direction in the context of global governance change in the 21 st century”. Ngo Xuan Binh‟s book entitled “The Relationship between Vietnam and South Korea in the New International Context” [2, pp. 296-297] suggests new ideas on upgrading the bilateral relationship to a “Strategic Cooperative Partnership” in the 21st century. However, the book fails to put forward more detailed strategic directions in response to the shifting patterns of recent world governance, and also does not clarify the fundamental principles, global and regional, on which a comprehensive 21 st century “strategic cooperative partnership” should be based. 3. The research objectives With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Cold War has ended. Moreover, both East and West Germany have been unified. Despite this, many legacies of the Cold War persist in the East Asian region, especially in the Korean peninsula. With the international order experiencing rapid change, many new and complex global issues have arisen. Most of these are having an impact on the East Asian region. Within this region, two very sensitive problems, the North Korean nuclear issue and territorial dispute in the South China Sea, remain unsolved. At the same time, a now wealthy and strong China has been demonstrating its power in the territorial disputes with Japan over the Senkaku islands and with Vietnam and Philippines over the Sprately islands. Nationalism in the East Asia is also becoming strident and attractive to many leaders as a political tool. Many scholars predict that rising China 9 might attempt to change the global governance system centered on the Western countries, with the passage of time. Under these circumstances, Vietnam and Korea need to consider a variety of realistic alternative diplomatic strategies. This dissertation looks at Korean and Vietnamese strategic cooperation in the context of global governance change in the 21st century. It focuses on the questions “What should be the next step in ROK-Vietnam relations in the context of global governance change?” “What measures should ROK and Vietnam takes to deal with various and complex factors,” and “What are their most realistic policy options in 21 st century.” The dissertation then proposes new mid and long- term visions for upgrading ROK-Vietnam relations in the 21 st century. 4. The task of the dissertation The dissertation focuses on solving the following tasks: 1) Studying the importance of the changing process and characteristics of global governance mechanisms in contemporary world history 2) Finding possible ways of defining international/regional/bilateral special events and situations by international political theory 3) Trying to clarify the implications of these developments and approaches for the Asian region, especially ROK and Vietnam, and analyzing possible ways forward for both countries as they respond to bilateral issues that might arise in the future 4) Examining realistic alternatives for ROK and Vietnam to upgrade and develop their relations in all sectors, including political and military cooperation 10 5) Proposing some recommendations for a “ROK-Vietnam new mid and long term strategic vision”, a new strategic cooperative model in the years to come. 5. Scope of the research The period covered by this research shall be limited to that extending from the end of the Cold War in 1991 to 2020. The dissertation analyzes the global governance structure that was formed after the Second World War in 1945. It then provides an overview of global and regional governance changes and their recent characteristics from the end of the Cold War to the present. It also analyzes the responses of ROK and Vietnam to the global governance changes during this period. The analysis of the strategic cooperative partnership between ROK and Vietnam begins from 1992, when the two countries established their diplomatic relations, and continues to cover the following 30 years. Regarding subject matter, the dissertation takes up the reshaping of relations among major international actors, especially the United States and China, along with international organizations such as UN, IMF, WB, G-8, G- 20 and ASEAN. It will also analyze power redistribution trends among the great powers and examine their foreign policies in the East Asia region. The dissertation pays particular attention to the foreign policies of ROK and Vietnam in response to global governance change from the middle of the 1980s to the present. 6. Research methods The dissertation avoids technical discussion as much as possible, 11 focusing first on developing a narrative of the great changes in global order and governance and highlighting their distinguishing features and implications. Subsequently, trends in Post Cold War ROK-Vietnam relations within this framework are discussed with reference, where appropriate, to political economy and international relations theory. Again, where appropriate, the author makes use of historical, logical, statistical, comparative and mathematical approaches, time series analysis, and so on. Generally speaking, historical and time series approaches are the most important in this work, especially when examining changing trends in global governance mechanisms, and issues such as terrorism, climate change, food security. These approaches are also indispensable for analyzing the foreign policies of all actors, including those of ROK and Vietnam. So to is the application of logic, which can often reveal the hidden, underlying significance of apparently unconnected events. Dialectical approaches can be employed to demonstrate the essential unity in US policies and actions in the world at large as well as the East Asian region. Comparative methods help uncover differences in United States‟ foreign policy on global/regional/bilateral issues and towards particular countries. Statistical and mathematical data is also utilized, where relevant. 7. The contribution of the dissertation - The dissertation is the first work done in Vietnam to provide in-depth ...velopment and common prosperity. It will be necessary, in short, to develop fairer and more efficient structures of global governance that reflect changes in the world political and economic landscape. 1.3. Global Governance: Reshaping and Prospects 1.3.1. Possibility of Reshaping Global Governance Is it possible to continue to keep the present world order system? When is it possible to readjust relationships among the powers? Who and which countries can take the lead to create a new global governance order? With rapid globalization, a greater pace of change has caused global uncertainty and instability. Due to the ever more intensive interdependence between 31 countries, a policy implemented in one country may have a very great impact on the others, which is called the “butterfly effect.”5 The transnational economic and financial systems that have emerged due to the rapid spread of the economic interdependence have not entirely eradicated the instability in the financial and trade areas within the global economy. As noted in 1.2.3 above, the global governance system has recently faced double-facet crises: one aspect is legitimacy, the other is effectiveness. "Legitimacy" refers to the fact that the present global governance system cannot paper over the widening gaps between its institutions and assumptions and the changing global power distribution, the "Rise of the Rest", symbolized, for example, by the emergence of BRICS as a powerful political in entity. "Effectiveness" means that the present global governance system cannot manage the world peace and prosperity effectively, and is becoming weaker as time goes on [139, pp. 39-41]. For example, it is questionable whether or not the UN collective security system has reached its limits as a vehicle to keep the world peace [42, pp. 59-60]. At the same time, the IMF could not prevent the US financial crisis in 2009 from becoming a full blown global economic crisis. In addition, many people also blame the World Bank for its ignorance of the reality of developing countries, many of which have relapsed into underdevelopment [119]. This kind of governance crisis stems 5 According to this metaphor, the beat of a buterfly wing in Brazil may cause storm in Texas in the United States. That is to say, with the multimedia revolution, the flow of information in the contemporary world has become quicker, to such an extent that just a small change in any part of the earth can be transferred throughout the world in just a second. For example, the economic crisis that originated from U.S at the end of 2008 caused an expanded global economic crisis. 32 from a variety of factors, including institutional scarcity, insufficient financial resources, policy missteps, and United States‟ unilateralism. For instance, in the security area, the United Nations has expanded its peace-keeping operations throughout the world. Yet these global activities have been insufficient to meet the rising demands for regional cooperation. Therefore, regional approaches to security cooperation are being seen as an alternative to the inadequacy of globalization and the danger of nationalism [34, pp. 95]. Since the late 1990s, there have been many demands for the reform of the United Nations (UN). However, there is not any consensus about what reform might mean in practice. Moreover, the DOHA round of negotiations does not show signs of an early settlement. The road ahead for international cooperation to combat climate change is littered with big obstacles rather than stepping stones. Therefore, the world is looking for a new global governance architecture that includes both developed countries and emerging countries. Various alternatives are proposed by world leaders for changing the basic structure of world order and reforming the existing global governance. Recently, some possible ways for managing the international monetary system effectively and stably have been discussed in G-20. G-20 members account for 85 percent of the world economy, 80 percent of global trade, and two thirds of the world's population. 1.3.2. Reshaping Prospects of Global Governance With globalization advancing rapidly, global governance has become unstable, shaken by recurrent financial crises, together with uncertainty in world markets. Exchange rates often fluctuate and this is a major factor in 33 perpetuating anxiety. Under these circumstances, the world has great concerns about the possibility of a shift in global order during the coming years. There is a strong pressure for the re-adjustment of global governance structures to reflect the new equilibrium between emerging countries and the advanced countries. With their growing economic power and enhanced position, the emerging economies such as BRICS will try to reshape the existing governance regime, which has hitherto been dominated by Western countries like the United States, Japan and EU. In the real world of today, problems lie both in the areas cost sharing and the providing of public goods. Owing to their power, large rich nations can sometimes push global governance in the right direction and enhance the effectiveness of international organizations, while at many other times they cause conflicts and doubts by neglecting the rights of developing countries. Accordingly, the reshaping process of global governance in the 21 st century, might well witness fierce disputes between the Western economies and the emerging economies. Nowadays, there remain different views between of the two blocs on how to reform international trade and financial governance. According to 2011 WTO statistics, the GDP of BRICS countries (18 trillion dollars) are almost the same as that of the United States, Japan and Germany (21 trillion dollars). If BRICS maintains its current economic growth rate, its GDP will exceed that of the United States, Japan and Germany within 5-6 years. This will be a key factor in the formation and adjustment process for a new system of global economic governance. It is also predicted that, with the rise of new emergent countries, the unilateral US hegemony in world politics might 34 be loosened. The G-8 role may also be weakened. Instead, G-20, which includes the BRICS countries among its members, might take over the role of controlling world economic order in its capacity as the highest ranking global multilateral economic organization. Moreover, within the existing basic order, the world order may move to a bipolar system – G2, in which, the United States and China take the key roles. In addition, the global security or economic institutions functioning at this stage were created in the period following the Second World War. Their mandate and their resources are no longer effective today. Economic and demographic changes have not been reflected either in the governance of such institutions or in their decision making structures. Which factors might influence the reshaping the global governance? Global issues like drugs, terrorism, poverty and climate change have been emerging. Today, one of the leading threats to energy security is the significant increase in energy prices either in the world markets – as has occurred in a number of energy crises over the years – or the imposition of price increases by an oligopoly or monopoly supplier, cartel or country [43]. Moreover, with the increasing necessity and urgency of measures to combat climate change, an environmentally friendly energy industry would act as a newly developed engine for economic growth in the future [87, pp. 122]. 1.4. Regional Governance Change in East Asia 1.4.1. General Overview The 21 st century is regarded as the era of the East-Asia region. The East Asia region has since 1992 played the great role of an engine for growth in 35 the world economy. However, this region remains racked by fierce rivalry among the great powers, by the North Korean nuclear issue, territorial disputes, nationalism. These sensitive issues can be a serious threat to not only to regional security but also to sustainable development. Although it is difficult to demarcate the sub-regions in the East Asia, it roughly consists of Northeast Asia (including China, Japan, DPRK and ROK) and Southeast Asia, including altogether 11 countries. In the past 20 years, in parallel with the change of global governance, the East Asia has experienced major changes in regional governance. Currently, the Northeast Asia has grown to occupy 18.4% of the world economy and is constantly upgrading its position and influence in the international arena. Meanwhile the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as one of the major engines of regional integration in Southeast Asia, has grown to become the fifth largest economy in the world. ASEAN has played a bridge role to keep regional peace and prosperity in East Asia. 1.4.2. Northeast Asia: Regional Cooperation and Change The Northeast Asia has witnessed remarkable economic development, even in the absence of any leadership to resolve disputes, political institutional differences and historical issues. Recently, however, political instability in this region has been becoming more serious due to North Korean nuclear weapons development, territorial disputes between China and Japan, and the reemergence of Japanese conservative nationalist and revisionist ideology. Since 2008, ROK, China and Japan have jointly held various summits and ministerial level meetings in many fields. However, due to the recent China-Japan territorial disputes and the historical perspective of the present Japanese government, the dialogue channels between senior leaders of the three countries have become dysfunctional. 36 Figure 3: Proportional Size of ROK, Chinese, and Japanese Economies in the World (Unit: %) Year/country 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 ROK 1.58 1.47 1.37 1.48 1.66 1.66 1.77 1.84 China 3.31 3.49 3.86 3.72 3.88 4.03 5.02 5.53 Japan 13.72 15.24 13.18 12.38 11.90 11.31 10.15 9.00 ROK+China+Japan 18.61 20.20 19.89 17.57 17.44 17.00 16.95 16.37 Hongkong 0.53 0.53 0.52 0.50 0.44 0.40 0.40 0.39 ROK+China+Japan + Hongkong 19.14 20.27 20.42 18.07 17.88 17.40 17.35 16.76 (Source: World Bank, 1999-2006) Regarding the year 2006, ROK, China and Japan made up 17.6% of global trade, 71.1% of regional trade and 88% of GDP in the North Asia region (ASEAN+3). Figure 4: ROK, China and Japan Trade Trends (Source: IMF, 1993-2007) 37 The three nations accounted for 15.0% of the total world trade in 2007, showing a continuous increase (12.9% in 2002 → 14.3% in 2004 → 14.9% in 2006 → 15.0% in 2007) Figure 5: ROK, China and Japan Trade Ratio in World Trade (Source: IMF, 2002-2006) 1.4.3. Southeast Asia: Regional Cooperation and Change The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), one of the major engines of regional integration in Southeast Asia, was formed in 1967 by Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Since then, membership has expanded to include Brunei, Burma (Myanmar), Cambodia, Laos, and Vietnam. ASEAN was originally conceived as a somewhat political entity. It has a population of approximately 615 million people, which is 8.9% of the world's population. In 2012, its combined nominal GDP had grown to more than 2.3 trillion US dollars. Its economic growth has been robust, and trade and investment flows have been soaring. If ASEAN were a single political entity, it would rank as the fifth largest economy in the world. 38 Figure 6: ASEAN GDP in the World (Unit: Million US Dollars) Country Population in millions GDP Nominal (millions of USD) GDP per capita(USD) EU 502.5 16.584.007 32.528 US 324.8 15.684.750 49.922 China 1,354.0 8.227.037 6.076 Japan 127.6 5.963.969 46.736 ASEAN 615.6 2.305.542 3.745 ROK 50.01 1.155.872 23.113 World 7013.4 71.707.302 10.200 (Source: IMF 2012 estimates) Figure 7: ASEAN members’ GDP per capita (IMF 2012 estimates) In d o n es ia T h a i la n d M a la y si a S in g a p o re P h il ip p in es V ie tn a m M y a n m a r B ru n ei C a m b o d ia L a o s Population in millions 244 64.3 29.4 5.4 95.8 90.3 63/6 0.4 15.2 6.3 GDP per capita USD 3.59 5.678 10.307 51.162 2.614 1.578 835 41.703 934 1.446 (Source: IMF 2012 estimates) Southeast Asia is one of the most diverse and dynamic regions of the world. This diversity is manifest in its levels of economic development and 39 income, economic regimes and policy challenges. Despite this diversity, several initiatives have been launched to promote integration in the region. At the regional level the goal is to achieve” a single market and production base” by 2015 and an „ASEAN Community‟, resembling the EU by 2020. However, there are many challenges in the integration process of Southeast Asia. Compared to the EU, Southeast Asia is characterized by the following features: both the EU and Southeast Asia show diversity, but this is greater in Southeast Asia; Southeast Asia has experienced market-driven integration while in the EU the institutional framework led the integration process. Political momentum was very strong from the beginning of the integration process in EU, while political will in Southeast Asia is relatively weak, although it has recently committed to a faster pace of integration [79, pp 39- 40]. The most manifest obstacle to the integration process is the disparity among member countries based on the above economic indicators. Looking at GDP per capita, for instance, there is an over 100-fold difference between the wealthiest and the poorest member. Despite of these characteristics, Southeast Asia has since the 1990s played the leading role to keep regional peace and prosperity in the Asia- Pacific region. In the security area, ASEAN established ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in 1994 to discuss security issues in this region. ARF is the only multilateral security framework to promote trust–building and regional peace. In the field of economic cooperation, ASEAN has also made efforts to facilitate trade, investment and personal exchanges in the Asia-Pacific region. In the past 20 years, great strides have been made in economic integration 40 between ASEAN and Korea, China, Japan, India and others. Regional integration in Southeast Asia has been strengthening both within ASEAN and in cooperation with neighboring countries under different guises such as ASEAN, ASEAN+3 and ASEAN+6 (Australia, China, India, Japan, ROK, and New Zealand). In its relations with ASEAN, ROK aspires to develop cooperation with ASEAN member countries. It has been over 20 years since the ROK became a dialogue partner with ASEAN. During this period, ASEAN became ROK‟s second largest trading partner and second largest investment destination. Some 230,000 people from ASEAN countries are living in ROK, while the same numbers of Koreans are living the ASEAN region. The two parties have made extraordinary progress in diverse areas including politics, economy, culture, education and tourism. It is notable that all members of ASEAN have contributed to the cause of peace and security in the Korean Peninsula so that the region can be seen as a pivot of Korean diplomacy. 1.5. Remarks In relation to future global order and governance, many people ask whether it is possible to maintain the existing structures in the 21 st century? How are they likely to be reshaped? Who and which country can take the lead in this process? Globalization has brought with it a new form of governance. The concept of global governance has not yet been defined for “unanimous and unifying usage in the study of international relations”, but “governance” is a useful concept as a descriptive tool for international cooperation. It is not an analytical tool. During the Cold War era, a combination of the global 41 security governance was maintained by the “Balance of Power” among the great powers and the “UN Collective Security System”, while global economic governance was based on GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade), IMF (International Monetary Fund) and WB (World Bank). However, the collapse of the former Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War brought about a reshaping of the world order and its governance system. This momentous event resulted in an unprecedented peaceful revolution, without any world war. Since the end of the Cold War, the salient features of global governance change have been: i) reshaping of the previous bipolar systems into a uni-polar system under US hegemony, ii) the emergence of a wealthy and strong China, together with BRICS, iii) strengthening regionalism with deepening globalization, iv) emerging global issues in world politics, requiring UN reform, v) increasing uncertainty and instability concerning maintenance of governance architecture. With their growing global economic power and position in the world community, the emerging economies may attempt to change the present governance regime, which is dominated by Western countries such as the US, Japan and the EU. During the reshaping process competition and disputes between the Western countries and the emerging nations might frequently take place. It can also be predicted that, with the rise of emerging countries, US hegemony in world politics might be loosened. World order might come to be managed jointly by the US and China. This would mean the emergence of another bipolar system – G2, in which, the United States and China can play the key roles in the world community. Finally, with 42 rapid globalization, uncertainty and instability in the global economic and political governance are growing. All in all, the most important determinant of successful development is that all countries do their best to keep global governance stable and sustainable. Global governance architecture cannot operate without the simultaneous cooperation of governments, the private sector and civil society. Good governance, transparency, accountability and capacity for effective development policy are therefore central for all global issues. Nowadays, the West, G-8 cannot effectively cope with global issues without the help of the newly emerging countries. Moreover, G-8 may seem something of an oddity – an archaic reminder of a time before the rise of the BRICS and the supposed decline of the Western powers, although many argue that the West is still very much alive and kicking – and, driven by its most dynamic members, has a chance of remaining the top of the heap for the foreseeable future [40]. The recent global recession has adversely affected the world economy. The global economy went through many difficulties in 2011. Still much uncertainty remains, but slowly, a little progress is being made. Amid the worldwide economic slowdown in 2011, China posted a remarkable over 8 % of economic growth, while the US growth fell below 2% [39]. This is well above the world average, giving much confidence that China will continue as a powerful growth driver for the world economy. World leadership is now gradually shifting to the emerging countries. This trend is bound to cause adjustments in relationships among the super powers, which may become fierce in the 21 st century. 43 CHAPTER 2 ROK AND VIETNAM: POLICY RESPONSES TO GLOBAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNANCE CHANGE SINCE 1991 2.1. ROK and Vietnam: Responses to Global Governance Change 2.1.1. Why it was Necessary for ROK and Vietnam to Respond Since the end of the Cold War, globalization has been proceeding rapidly, together with the development of information technology and transportation. Globalization has created interconnected relationships among countries and people, deepening the interdependence between political actors. In addition, globalization also plays the role as a catalyst for economic development between nations and boosts the world‟s GDP growth, creating enormous economic advantages for humanity. However, the process also gives rise to particular problems which need to be resolved through international collaboration, such as global environmental issues and terrorism. Currently, Vietnam and ROK are flexibly responding to global changes and also improving their economic and political positions in the international arena. Both nations experienced wars in the Cold War era and began their economic growth with hardly any of the necessary infrastructures. However, today ROK is a major economic power ranked 15 th overall and 8 th in terms the scale of commercial transactions worldwide. Meanwhile, rising from the ashes of war, Vietnam has developed into a middle income country, and it is predicted to be the pillar of Southeast Asian economic growth in the near future. 44 In contrast, North Korea was unable to demonstrate the flexibility to cope with the transformation of the global governance system and therefore became one of the most backward countries in the world. From the early 1990s to 2012, its GDP stagnated at US$1,000. That has caused many difficulties in people‟s lives such as hunger and insufficient food supply. The economic gap between ROK and North Korea has grown 50 times. Without a doubt, in the context of increasingly intense competition between nations, a positive response is crucial to cope with the global changes. In other words, if, over the past 20 years, ROK had simply continued its foreign policy from the Cold War era and had not promoted normalization of relations with socialist nations such as China, it would absolutely not have become the major economic power it is today. Similarly, if Vietnam had not made any innovation in its policies, it would surely have encountered difficulties similar to those which North Korea currently faces. Thus, we can see the importance of a “positive response to the global change.” Thanks to their positive and active responses to global transformation, ROK and Vietnam have successfully entered the ranks of developing countries. Against this backdrop, it is important to analyze exactly how ROK and Vietnam have coped with the global and regional governance changes in their foreign policies throughout this period. 2.1.2. ROK’s Policy Responses After the end of World War II, ROK‟s regional diplomacy was decisively influenced by the Cold War. To protect its national security and promote its economic development, ROK became one of the closest friends of the United 45 States during the Cold War era. It was in this context that President Park Chung-hee dispatched ROK troops to the Vietnam War. ROK‟s participation in the Vietnam War laid the foundations for its rapid economic growth in the 1970s. With the dawn of the end of the Cold War in the middle of the 1980s, ROK‟s foreign policy changed. It normalized relations with erstwhile enemies such as the Soviet Union, and also began to pursue economic opportunities in China and Vietnam. This foreign policy was called the “Northern Policy.” Finally, in 1991, ROK and North Korea simultaneously became members of the United Nations, putting an end to one aspect of their fierce confrontation and competition. In relation to security, Seoul‟s geopolitical situation is often described, with reference to a traditional Korean proverb, as that of a shrimp swimming between whales and in imminent danger of getting hurt when the huge whales around it begin to fight [47, pp. 2]. Behind this metaphor lies the indisputable fact that ROK – surrounded by the great powers China, Japan, Russia and the United States – has only limited leeway within its foreign policy and must maneuver constantly between the more powerful regional actors [18, pp. 64-90]. With the context of the lingering Cold War security challenges that continue parallel to globalization, ROK has pursued strong alliance diplomacy with the United States on the one hand, and balanced multilateral diplomacy on the other. ROK has, under the umbrella of the UN collective security system, protected its security since the Korean War in 1950. Before 1990, ROK maintained diplomatic relations almost exclusively with Western countries based on its firm relationship with the United States. 46 ROK integrated into the world economic system centering around GATT and the WB at the early 1950s. ROK has also very positively and smoothly responded to the changing global economic governance. As a result, it is one of the few countries that managed the transition from a rural, underdeveloped society to a modern economy in just one generation. Economic growth averaged 8% a year between 1963 and 1993. The last fifty years of ROK is referred to as the “Age of Wonders”. Economic development that began in the early 1960s accelerated as ROK transitioned into a developed country in only forty years. It is obvious that political, economic, cultural and other factors have contributed to actualizing the “Miracle of the Han River” [52, pp. 22]. ROK also began to integrate with the global/regional economic system centering around APEC, WTO and OECD in 1990s. The 1997 Asian crisis made clear the dangers of an excessively indebted corporate sector, with weak profitability, and a poorly supervised and shaky financial system. With its fast recovery from the crisis thanks to IMF assistance, ROK‟s nominal GDP became the eleventh largest in the world in 2002. Since then, the country‟s economic size has been ranked between 11 th and 15 th in the world. In 2013, its economic size was ranked 15 th in the world. ROK has recovered faster and more vigorously from the 2008 global crisis than most OECD countries, and currently enjoys low unemployment and low government debt. Growth slowed in late 2011, reflecting the deterioration in the world economy, but was projected at around 3.5 percent two years ago. ROK has been one of the fastest-growing OECD countries, with real GDP rising by more than 4% per annum during the past decade. Rapid growth narrowed the per capita income 47 gap with the United States from 62% in 1991 to 36% in 2010 [82]. In 2011, for the first time, ROK surpassed $1 trillion dollars in annual trade volume, making it just one of nine nations to do so. Before beginning its industrial drive in 1962, ROK was still one of the poorest countries in the world. In 1961, ROK had a total trade volume of $357 million, with exports amounting to a mere $40 million. Half a century later, ROK crossed the $1 trillion threshold in total trade. ROK became the ninth country in the world to have its trade volume exceed USD one trillion, following the US, Germany, China, Japan, France, England, and Italy. Joining this “one trillion club,” means that ROK‟s trade has advanced from the periphery to the center of the world‟s market. Many experts attach significant meaning to this achievement in trade volume, but also warn that ROK should brace itself for the Two-Trillion-Dollar Trade Era. Figure 8: Total ROK Trade Volume 1957-2011 (Unit: Millions US Dollars) (Source: Korean International Trade Association, 1957-2011) 48 This remarkable achievement is a result of the fact that ROK opened its markets to other countries in all sectors based on Free Trade Agreements (FTA) negotiated with the US, EU, ASEAN, etc. With rapid globalization, ROK thus successfully responded to the global/regional governance change. As a result, ROK became a member of the “one trillion club” in terms of GDP and Trade volume. 2.1.3. Vietnam’s Policy Responses After reunification in 1975, Vietnam was a war-torn, somewhat isolated country which had to deal with both internal difficulties and external invaders. In such a complicated context, the top priority of Vietnamese diplomacy was to gain and protect the country‟s independence, sovereignty, unity and territorial integrity [116, pp. 235-242]. To achieve this goal, the Vietnamese government was forced to adopt economic and political reforms (Doi Moi), starting in 1986. Under the Doi Moi renewal policy, Vietnam‟s foreign policy became “more pragmatic, flexible and less ideological.” [35]. A new worldview emerged within the Vietnamese leadership, which was heavily influenced by the Gorbachev‟s “new political thinking” in the Soviet Union. The new worldview centered around the concept of modernization and can be seen as a complete rejection of the anti-imperialism that has hitherto dominated the country‟s foreign policy stance. The two leading figures of the grand strategy of modernization, Nguyen Co Thach and Vo Van Kiet, agreed on the importance of “globalization” and “multi-polarity,” as well as on the decisive role of national interests in practical world politics [115, pp. 42-49]. Based on this strategy, during the 49 course of the Seventh Party Congress (1991), the Eighth Party Congress (1996), the Ninth Party Congress (2001) and the Tenth Party Congress (2006), diplomatic strategies and policies were step by step revised and completed. In July, 2003, Vietnamese Communist Party Central Committee adopted a “Strategy of Fatherland Defense in a New Situation,” which stipulated new criteria for the determination of friends and foes. Foreign states would be considered either as “cooperation partner... CONCLUSION Many experts consider the 21 st century as the „Era of Asia.‟ In 2010, China was the second biggest economic power of the world with a GDP of 5.1 trillion USD. It was also the world‟s leading country in terms of total export volume (1.2 trillion USD) and possessed the greatest foreign exchange reserves (2.6 trillion USD). China is further upgrading its already strong position as an economic, diplomatic and military power. On the basis of these remarkable achievements and through an active diplomacy appropriate to its enhanced international status, China will endeavor to strengthen its voice in the international community and continually expand its influence, promoting changes in the existing East Asian order, while maintaining its paramount position. It is thus important to develop a new strategy for cooperation in line with the rise of China and the constant changes in regional and global governance. As mentioned above, the rise of China in the 21 st century is a fact that the entire world has to face, and the only way for small to medium neighboring powers such as ROK and Vietnam to ensure their peace and prosperity is to minimize the risks that the rise of China brings, while actively capitalizing on the new opportunities. The current developments that work positively toward enhanced bilateral ties will continue to work in favor of the two nations in the future. The role of visionary leadership cannot be overemphasized in this process. In the transition from an American and Japanese-centered regional political economy to a Sino-centric one, smaller states such as ROK and Vietnam will be forced to calculate their economic and political interests simultaneously. 137 In the 2010 national identity poll carried out by EAI, 23 76.8 percent of South Koreans viewed their country as a middle power while 19.9 percent answered that ROK is a weak power. To the question of "what kind of role should ROK take in resolving international problems?," 53.1 percent answered that ROK should play a bridging role between advanced countries and developing countries; 24.7 percent believed that it should play a supporter role by helping countries that are suffering from poverty or natural disasters; 19.1 percent favored a leading role in setting agenda and norms in international society. It is probably realistic that ROK should, as a responsible member of the international community, play a bridging role between advanced countries and developing countries as well as a supporter role by helping countries that are suffering from poverty or natural disasters. In relation to upgrading ROK-Vietnam “Strategic Cooperative Partnership” in the 21st century, both countries, strengthening their constructive and forward-looking relationship based on mutual benefit and trust and also acting as driving forces for growth in the East Asian region, will create a new cooperative model which adapts their foreign policies smoothly to the rapidly changing global order and governance. At the present time, based on their political will and creative efforts to overcome various challenges caused by the global financial crisis, they are forging new cooperative model. Historically, they have had long experience of protecting their independence from foreign aggression and of overcoming the sufferings caused by unintended war and poverty. In the face of all difficulties, both the Korean and Vietnamese people have displayed undaunted courage. This common national characteristic is the greatest advantage that the two countries can bring into play to boost their growth in the new era. 23 East Asian Institute (EAI) is located at the Sung Kyun Kwan University in Korea. 138 What is the next step in ROK-Vietnam relations? The prospects for ROK-Vietnam economic cooperation are very bright. Bilateral cooperation can play an important role developing in the relationship between ROK and ASEAN as well as the ties between ROK and the Asia-Pacific region as a whole [75, pp. 21]. Based on historical similarities and the developing experience of the bilateral relationship over the past 20 years, on the mutually complementary of economic structures and on their cultural closeness, both countries, ROK as a tiger of Northeast Asia and Vietnam as a dragon of the Southeast Asia, will together prosper and lead a new era of Asian growth in the 21 st century. In order to promote the ROK-Vietnam strategic cooperative partnership in the years to come, it is essential to establish and develop a comprehensive long-term policy based on the principle of mutual interest and respect. There are various recommendations for “Specific Cooperative Activities” to enhance the “ROK-Vietnam strategic cooperative partnership in the 21 st century”. One of the most important is that both countries should soon conclude ROK-Vietnam Free Trade Agreement (FTA) negotiations to upgrade entire legal and institutional framework of bilateral relations. Despite historical and cultural similarities, there still exist differences in terms of political institutions and development gaps between ROK and Vietnam. Both countries, moreover, recall the painful history of the Vietnam War, in which ROK forces participated as US allies. However, the fact is that most Vietnamese have a favourable image of Koreans, as high as 96 percent [135, pp.20-40]. The image of ROK as a country and the image of its products are also high in Vietnam and have been continuously improving. In the future, the two countries need to promote their bilateral ties in an even more brotherly fashion through building mutual trust. 139 With regard to multicultural families, the death of a 17-year-old Vietnamese bride at the hands of her violent Korean husband in 2007 shocked many Vietnamese people and become a diplomatic issue between the two countries. In the future, such incidents may occur again and damage mutual respect. Therefore, it is essential that ROK government increase its involvement in international marriages and promote policies to support multicultural families. Moreover, the government needs to increase administrative support to ensure that international marriages take place without human right violations, as well as empowering brides to live independently if their marriages fail. Lastly, the economic structure is shifting toward industrialization and modernization. Despite the recent global recession, ROK remains the 15th economy in the world and has the 8th greatest trade volume (US$100 billion) in the world, while Vietnam ranks among high-growth countries in the Asia Pacific region. Vietnam‟s average for the 2001-2010 periods stood at 7.27%. Last year‟s growth rate reached at 5.03%. From now on, ROK and Vietnam will be obliged to chart out a new “Totally Comprehensive and Long-term Strategic Cooperative Partnership,” enabling them to swiftly adapt to the reshaping of global and regional governance. They will also ultimately be obliged, as middle powers, to contribute to maintaining peace and prosperity in the Asia-Pacific and beyond, and playing pivotal roles in the shaping of a new regional and global order. 140 AUTHOR’S WORKS 1. Park, N.W. (2011), “Sự Nổi Lên Của Trung Quốc Và Quan Hệ Trung– Hàn: Bước Tiếp Theo Là Gì?”, Tạp Chí Kinh Tế Và Chính Trị Thế Giới, Số 1 (177), Viện Hàn Lâm Khoa Học Xã Hội Việt Nam, tr. 3-10. 2. Park, N.W (2011), “Quan Hệ Việt-Hàn: Thành Tựu Và Vấn Đề Trong Hợp Tác Phát Triển Quốc Tế Và Hợp Tác Việt Nam-Hàn Quốc”, Tạp Chí Nghiên Cứu Đông Bắc Á, số 4 (122), Viện Hàn Lâm Khoa Học Xã Hội Việt Nam, tr.3-18. 3. Park, N.W (2011), “Sự Biến Đổi Cơ Chế Quản Trị Toàn Cầu Và Chiến Lược Ứng Phó Của Việt Nam”, Tạp Chí Kinh Tế Và Chính Trị Thế Giới, số 5 (181), Viện Hàn Lâm Khoa Học Xã Hội Việt Nam, tr.13-22. 4. Park, N.W. (2011), “World Energy Security and Climate Change Issues: Korea – Vietnam‟s Next Steps In The Years Ahead”, International Studies, 25, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, Hanoi, pp. 50. 5. Park N.W. (2013), “Những Thay Đổi Trong Chính Sách Đối Ngoại Của Việt Nam Và Hàn Quốc Sau Chiến Tranh Lạnh”, Tạp chí Nghiên Cứu Đông Bắc Á, số 6 (148), Viện Hàn Lâm Khoa Học Xã Hội Việt Nam, tr. 3-14. 141 LIST OF REFERENCES Vietnamese 1. Phạm Hải Bằng (2012), “Việt Nam – Hàn Quốc Đối Tác Hợp Tác Chiến Lược” (Vietnam-Korea Strategic Cooperative Partnership), 20 Năm Thiết Lập Quan Hệ Ngoại Giao, Tòa soạn Báo Thế giới & Việt Nam. 2. Ngô Xuân Bình (2012), “Quan hệ Việt Nam – Hàn Quốc Trong Bối Cảnh Quốc Tế Mới” (The Relationship between Vietnam – South Korea in the New International Context), NXB Từ điển Bách Khoa. 3. Đỗ Hải Nam, Ngô Xuân Bình, Sung-Yeal Koo (2005), “Hợp tác Kinh tế Việt Nam-Hàn Quốc Trong Bối Cảnh Hội Nhâp Đông Á” (Economic Cooperation between Vietnam and the Republic of Korea in the Context of East Asian Integration), NXB Khoa Học Xã Hội 4. Võ Hải Thanh, Tống Thùy Linh (2011), “Vị Trí Quan Hệ Hợp Tác Việt Nam – Hàn Quốc Trong Chiến Lược Đối Ngoại Của Mỗi Nước”, Hợp Tác Kinh Tế Việt Nam và Hàn Quốc: Triển Vọng Tới Năm 2020 (Korea and Vietnam Economic Cooperation: 2020‟ Prospect), NXB Khoa Học Xã Hội 5. Nguyễn Vũ Tùng (2007), “Chính Sách Đối Ngoại Việt Nam”, Học Viện Quan Hệ Quốc Tế, NXB Thế Giới, Hà Nội, tr. 213. 6. Park Noh Wan (2011), “Thành Tựu Và Vấn Đề Trong Hợp Tác Phát Triển Quốc Tế Và Hợp Tác Việt Nam-Hàn Quốc”, Tạp chí Nghiên Cứu Đông Bắc Á, số 4 (122), tr. 4-18. 7. Park Noh Wan (2011), “Trung Quốc và Mối Quan Hệ Hàn-Trung”, Tạp Chí Kinh Tế và Chính Trị Thế Giới, Số 1 (177), tr. 3-10. 142 8. Park Noh Wan (2013), “Những Thay Đổi Trong Chính Sách Đối Ngoại Của Việt Nam Và Hàn Quốc Sau Chiến Tranh Lạnh”, Tạp chí Nghiên Cứu Đông Bắc Á, số 6 (148), tr. 3-14. English 9. Abbott, P., Tarp, F. (2011), “Globalization Crises, Trade and Development in Vietnam”, United Nations University. 10. Amstrong, C.K. (1990), “South Korea‟s Northern Policy”. Pacific Review, 3(1), Oxford University Press, pp. 35-45. 11. Asian Development Bank (2009), “The Economic of Climate Change in Southeast Asia: Regional Review”, online: asia.pdf 12. Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2010), “Chairman‟s Statement of the 13 th ASEAN Plus Three Summit”, Hanoi, online: www.aseansec.org/25484.htm. 13. Barber, L. (2011), “The end of US hegemony: Legacy of 9/11”, Financial Times, online: bd7e-00144feab49a.html#axzz2lJ6WigRi 14. BBC Vietnamese (2012),“Vietnam 2011, Most Difficult Economics Since1991”,online: 15. Beeson, M. (2002), “The United States and Southeast Asia: Change and Continuity in American Hegemony”, online: uq.edu.au/eserv/UQ:11001/mb2003.pdf, pp. 2-15. 143 16. Blin, A., Marin, G. (2007), “Rethinking Global Governance”, Charles Leopold Mayer Foundation for the Progress of Humankind (FPH), Paris,France, online: Rethinking_without_logo.doc, pp. 2-4. 17. Breuker, R. (2009), “Korea‟s Forgotten War: Appropriating and Subverting the Vietnam War in Korean Popular Imaginings” online: 18. Ceuster, K.D. (2005), “Pride and Prejudice in South Korea‟s Foreign Policy”, Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies, 21, pp. 64-90. 19. Chand, N. (2008), “Global Insights – Runaway Globalization without Governance”. Global Governance, 14, pp. 119–125. 20. CIA (2012), “Country Comparison: GDP (by Purchasing Power Parity)”, CIA World Fact Book, online:www.cia.gov/library /publications/the world fact book. 21. Citi Bank (2011), “Power Shifts, Emerging Economies and the New World Global Growth Generators Moving Beyond Emerging Markets and “BRICs”, CITI Investment Research and Analysis, Jakarta, Indonesia, pp. 23. 22. Clinton, H.R. (2010), “Remarks on Regional Architecture in Asia: Principles and Priorities”, US Department of State, online: 23. Cox, R.W. (1987), “Production, Power, and World Order”, Columbia University Press, New York. 144 24. David, H. (2000), “OPEC and World Crude Oil Markets from 1973 to 1994: Control, Oligopoly or Competitive”, The Energy Journal, 21(3), International Association for Energy Economics. 25. Đặng Thị Thanh Hương (2009), “Hanliu and Its Effect on Young Vietnamese”. Centre for Theoretical and Applied Culturology, online: 26. Đỗ Hương (2012), “To a higher plane”, Vietnam Economic Times, No. 224, online: times/01102012.htm#/26/zoomed, pp. 26-27. 27. Dumitriu, P. (2005), “Reformarea Sistemului Natiunilor Unite si Gestionarea Consecintelor Globalizarii”, Bucurecsti, pp. 246. 28. Disable World (2013), “Food Security Definition and Information”, online: 29. Economy Watch (1990), “1990 Economic Statistics and Indicators”, online: www.economywatch.com/economic/statistics/year/2010/ 30. Finkelstein, Lawrence S. (1995), "What is global governance," Global Governance, 1(3), pp. 367-372. 31. Friedman, T.L. (2008), “Hot, Flat and Crowded”. New York, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pp. 308. 32. Garnaut, J. (2010), “China Detonates Regional Goodwill,” Sydney Morning Herald, online: regional-goodwill-20101022-16xs1.html 33. Goldstein, J.S. (2005), “International Relations”, Pearson-Longman, New York, pp. 107. 145 34. Han, S. J., (1996), “The New International System: Regional & Global Dimensions”, The Ilmin International Relations Institute, Korea University, Oruem Press. 35. Hoàng Anh Tuấn (2009), “Doi Moi and the Remaking of Vietnam”, online: ml. 36. IEA (2010), “CO2 emissions from Fuel Combustion Highlights”. IEA Statistics 2010, online: Highlights.pdf 37. Il, S.K., Young, S.K. (2010), “The Korean Economy: Six Decades of Growth and Development”, The Committee for the Sixty-Year History of the Korean Economy. 38. IMF (2010), “Vietnam: Staff Report for the 2010 Ariticle IV consultation”, IMF Country report, 10/281, IMF, Washington DC. 39. IMF (2011), “World Economic Outlook 2011”, online: 40. IMF (2013), “Gradual Upturn in Global Growth During 2013”, World Economic Outlook Update, online: 41. Index Mundi (2012), “Korea - GDP per capita”, online: Korea /gdp-per-capita. 42. John G. Ikenburry (2003), “US Economic and Security Multilateralism.” In Foot, pp. 59-60. 146 43. Jones, B., Wright, T. (2012), “Meet the Guts”, Foreign Policy, online: the guts. 44. Joint Study Group (2011), “Korea-Vietnam FTA Joint Study Group Report”, Korea-Vietnam Summit Meeting, Seoul, Korea, pp. 6-9. 45. Kahler, M., Lake, D.A. (2003), “Globalization and Governance”, Governance in a Global Economy: Political Authority in Transition, Princeton University Press, pp. 7-8. 46. Kalra, S. (2011), “Consultative Group Meeting for Vietnam”, IMF, Hanoi, online: rr/2012/ 121012.pdf 47. Kang, D.C. (2007), “China Rising: Peace, Power and Order in East Asia”, Columbia University Press, New York, pp. 2. 48. Kang, S.H (2011), “Korea‟s Foreign Policy Dilemmas: Defining State Security and the Goal of National Unification”, Global Oriental, Kent. 49. Keohane, R.O., Robert, O., Nye J.S. (2000), “Globalization: What‟s New? What‟s Not ? (And So What?)”, Foreign Policy, 118, Washingtonpost Newsweek Interactive, pp. 115. 50. Kharas, H. (2010), “The Emerging Middle Class in the Developing Countries”. Working Paper 285, OECD Developing Center, pp. 22-29. 51. Kim, H.M (2006), “Global Gender Politics of Cross-Border Marriages: with a focus on marriages between Korean men and Vietnamese Women”, Economy and Society, 70, Korea, pp. 35. 52. Kim, S.T., Bùi Tất Thắng (2012), “Sharing Korean Development Experiences with Vietnam”, Social Science Publishing House, Hanoi, pp. 22. 147 53. Kim, Y.H (2009), “Korea and ASEAN Should Form a „Fishermen‟s Alliance‟”, Kyeonghang Sinmun, online: org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=8314032&jid=JJP&volumeId=1 2&issueId=02&aid=8314030 54. Kirton, J. (2011), “The G8: Legacy, Limitations and Lessons”, Toward the Consolidation of the G20, PP52-53, Korea Development Institute, Seoul. 55. Kiều Linh (2012), “Korea and Vietnam look to more prosperous times”. Vietnam Investment Review, online: news/en/province/korean-and-vietnam-look-to-more-prosperous- times.html 56. Korea Prime Minister‟s Office (2009), “Comprehensive Plan on Combating Climate Change”, Task Force on Climate Change, Republic of Korea. 57. Lee, S.J. (2012), “South Korea as New Middle Power Seeking Complex Diplomacy”, EAI Asia Security Imitative Working Paper, 25, online: 58. Lê Thị Thùy Vân (2009), “Vietnam's policy responses to the financial crisis”, EAI Background Brief, pp. 447. 59. Lê Minh Anh (2008). “Macroeconomic Policy Analysis of Vietnam- A Macro-Econometric Model Approach”, Graduate School of International Development, Nagoya University. 60. Lie, J., Kim, A.E. (2008), “South Korea in 2007: Scandals and Summits”, Asian Survey, 48(1), University of California Press, USA. 148 61. Masahiko, T., Ghura, D., Liu, L., Nehru, V. (2010), “Joint IMF/ World Bank Debt Sustainability Analysis 2010”, IMF, World Bank. 62. Mellor, D., Chu Thị Hồng Minh, Nguyễn Lưu Thục Phương (2011), “Economic Trends and Prospects in Developing Asia: Southeast Asia: Vietnam”, Asia Development Bank. 63. Migration News (2013), “Japan, Korea”, Migration News, 20(1), online: 64. Ministry of Employment and Labor (2013), “Employment Policy, Republic of Korea”, online: policy_view.jsp?idx=941. 65. Ministry of Foreign Affairs Vietnam (2013), “General Information about Countries and Regions”, online: 66. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (2007, 2009, 2012), “Korea Diplomatic White Paper”, Republic of Korea, online: 67. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of the Republic of Korea, Ministry of Industry and Trade of Vietnam (2011), “ROK-Vietnam FTA Joint Working Group Report”, pp. 10-15. 68. Muller, A.R. (2011). “South Korea‟s global food ambitions: Rural Farming and Land Grabs”. Online: 69. Nguyễn Ngọc Anh, Nguyễn Đức Nhật, Nguyễn Đình Chúc (2010), “The Impact of the Economic Stimulus on Domestic, Private Enterprises”, Development and Policies Research Centre, Hanoi. 149 70. Nguyễn Thị Thu Hằng, Nguyễn Đức Thành (2010), “Macroeconomic Determinants of Vietnam's inflation 2000-2010: Evidence and Analysis”, Vietnam Centre for Economic and Policy Research, University of Economic and Business, Vietnam National University Hanoi, Hanoi. 71. Ngô Văn Điểm, Trần Việt Phương, Vũ Thị Bích (2007), “Social Impacts of Vietnam‟s Accession into the WTO”, online: 9mentaires/NCIEC/Etude%20impacts%20sociaux%20- %20FSP%20I%20-%20EN.pdf, pp. 4. 72. Ngô Thị Trinh (2005), “Cooperative Relation between Vietnam and South Korea in the Field of Vietnam‟s Human Resource Development: Actual Situation, Trend and Recommendations on Solution”, The Conference on “Economic Cooperation between Korea and Vietnam under East Asian Economic Integration”, pp. 476-477. 73. Nguyễn Trần Phúc (2009), “Implications of exchange rate policy for Foreign Exchange Market Development: Vietnam”, 1986-2008, Griffith Business School. 74. Nguyễn Mạnh Hùng, Phạm Sỹ An (2011),” Impacts of the Global Economic Crisis on Foreign Trade in Lower Income Economies in the Greater Mekong Sub-region and Policy Responses: The Case of Vietnam and its Implications for Lao PDR and Cambodia”, Asia Pacific Research and Training Network on Trade Working Paper Series, 102, online: 150 75. Nguyễn Văn Nam, Tấn Thọ Đạt, Phạm Hồng Chương (2011), “International Conference On Economic Cooperation between Vietnam and Korea - Prospects for 2020”, Korea Foundation, Embassy of the Republic of Korea, National Economic University, Korea Association of Trade and Industry Studies, pp. 21. 76. Noland, M. (2001), “North Korea's External Economic Relations, Peterson Institute for International Economics”, online: 77. Nye, J.S. (2002), “The Paradox of American Power: why the World‟s Only Superpower Can‟t Go it Alone”, Oxford University Press, London. 78. Nye, J.S. (2004), “Power in the Global Information Age: from Realism to Globalization”, Rutledge, London, pp. 59-60. 79. OECD (2008), “Shaping Policy Reform and Peer Review in Southeast Asia. Integrating Economies amid Diversity”, OECD Publishing, pp. 39-40. 80. OECD (2009), “The Economics of Climate Change and Mitigation: Policies and Options for Global Action beyond 2012”, OECD Publishing. 81. OECD (2012), “Technology and Industry Outlook 2012”, pp. 264, online: tm. 82. OECD (2012), “OECD Economic Surveys: Korea 2012”, OECD Publishing, online: 151 83. OECD (2013), “Economic Outlook”, No 94, 19 November 2013, www.oecd.org/ OECD Economic Outlook. pp. 2 84. OECD (2013), “Economic Outlook for Southeast Asia, China and India; Beyond the Middle- Income Trap”, /seao/Pocket%20Edition%20SAEO2014.pdf 85. OECD (2013), “Korea: A Growing Influence in the Field of Development Cooperation,” online: 86. Park, J.W. (2012), “Korea and Vietnam: the Bilateral Relations”, The 4 th Annual Koret Conference on Korea and Vietnam: The National Experiences and Foreign Policies of Middle Powers, online: db.stanford.edu/evnts/6954/Transcipt_Luncheon_Speech_WEB.pdf, pp. 1. 87. Park, N.W. (2011), “Korea and Vietnam Relations: International ODA Issues and Korea- Vietnam Development Cooperation”, Vietnam Review of Northeast Asian Studies, Institute of North East Asian Studies Vietnam, Academy of Social Sciences, Hanoi, pp. 122, April 2011. 88. Park, N.W. (2011), “World Energy Security and Climate Change Issues: Korea – Vietnam‟s Next Steps in the Years Ahead”, International Studies, 25, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Diplomatic Academy of Vietnam, Hanoi, pp. 50, December 2011. 89. People's Daily Online (2001), “Kim Dae-jung Holds Talks With Vietnam Leader”, online: 200108/24/eng20010824_78162.html. 90. Petras, J. (2012), “China: Rise, Fall and Re-Emergence as a Global Power”, Global Research, March 07, 2012, online: 152 global-power/29644 91. Anh Phương (2013), Vietnam - South Korea: 20 Years of Fine Friendship Cooperation, “Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry”,online: 92. Prasad, E. (2010), "After the Fall", Finance & Development, 47(2). 93. Provost, C. (2012), “Millennium Development Goals – the Key Datasets You Need To Know”, The Guardian, online: matters/2012/oct/31/millennium-development-goals-key-datasets. 94. Phan Thanh Hoan, Ji Y.J. (2012), “An analysis of Korea-Vietnam Biltral Trade Relation”, Cheonbuk National University, South Korea, Hue College of Economics, Vietnam, online: http:// mpra.ub.uni- muenchen.de/48312/ 95. Rozman, G. (2007). “South Korea and Sino-Japanese rivalry: a Middle Power‟s Options with the East Asia Core Triangle”, The Pacific Review, 20(2), pp. 197-220. 96. Rupert, M.E., Rapkin, D.P. (1985) “The Erosion of United States Leadership Capabilities”, Rhythms in Politics and Economics, Praeger Publishers, New York, pp. 162-163. 97. Sheng, A. (2003), “Which way is United States Economy Headed”, Asia News Network, online: ?ud=20100830000474. 153 98. Shin, J.S. (2012), “Future Directions for the Korea-China Relationship”, Korean Observations on Foreign Relations, 14, Korean Council on Foreign Relations. 99. Spero, J.B. (2009), “Great Power Security Dilemmas for Pivotal Power Bridging”, Contemporary Security Policy, 30(1), pp. 147-171. 100. Stern, N. (2006), “The Economics of Climate Change”, The Stern Review, Cambridge University Press. 101. Tavasci, D., Toporowski, J. (2010), Minsky, “Crisis and Development”, Palgrave Macmillan. 102. Thanh Thu (2012), “FTA to ramp up Korean Cooperation”, Vietnam Investment Review, online: fta- to-ramp-up-korean-cooperation.html. 103. The Commission on Global Governance (1995), “Our Global Neighborhood”, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 4. 104. The Associated Press (2010), “Vietnam Plans 8 Nuclear Power Plants by 2030”, Jakarta Post, online: 2010/06/23/vietnam-plans-8-nuclear-power-plants-2030.html 105. Mỹ Thiên (2012), “Accompanying AO victims for Vietnam-South Korea Friendship arrived in Phan Thiet on November 3 rd” , Binh Thuan Newspaper, online: default.aspx?cat_id=664&news_id=51684 106. Tkacik, J.J. (2007), “A Chinese Military Superpower?” The Heritage Foundation. 154 107. Tow, W.T. (2007), “America‟s Asia-Pacific Strategy is Out of Kilter”, Current History, 106(701), pp. 287. 108. UNEP (2010), “Overview of the Korea‟s National Strategy for Green Growth”, The United Nations Environment Programme, Green Economy Initiative. 109. United Nations (2010), “The Millennium Development Goals Report 2010, UN MDG Summit”, New York, online: millenniumgoals/pdf/MDG%20Report%202010%20En%20r15%20- low%20res%2020100615%20-.pdf. 110. US Energy Information Administration (2013), “Country Analysis Briefs: South China Sea”, online: South_China_Sea. 111. VCCI (2006), “Vietnam Deals with Energy Crisis Risk”, Viet Capital Securities, online: d=&id=26221&catid=1219&tab=&title=Detail&lang=en-us. 112. Vietnam Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development (2012), “Argo- Forestry-Fishery Statistics 2012”, online: gov.vn/en/Pages/news.aspx?CategoryId=13. 113. Vietnam Report (2012), “Vietnam FDI by Sectors”, online: 114. Võ Trí Thành (2008), “Impacts of Global Financial Crisis on Vietnam's Economy and Recommended Policy Response”, Institute of Development Studies. 155 115. Vuving, A.L. (2005), “The Shaping of Foreign Policy: Vietnamese Grand Strategy after the Cold War”, University of California, pp 42- 49,online: 116. Vu Khoan (2012), “Vietnamese Diplomacy – Tradition and Present”, Vietnam on the Road to Integration and Sustainable Development, ICVNS 2012, The Fourth International Conference on Vietnamese Studies, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, pp. 235-242 117. Vuving, A.L. (2006), “Strategy and Evolution of Vietnam‟s China Policy: A Changing Mixture of Pathways”, Asian Study, 46(6), University of California, pp. 805-824. 118. Walter, N. (2010), “World Power Shifts to Emerging Economies”, Gulfnews, online: power-shifts-to-emerging-economies-1.692376. 119. Wall Street Journal (2012), “BRICS wants World Bank”, IMF Reforms. 120. Woods, N. (1999), "Good Governance in International Organizations." Global Governance, 5(1), Lynne Rienner Publishers. 121. World Bank (2013), “World Development Indicators”, online: 122. World Tourism Organization UNWTO (2012), “Vietnam Country Report 2012”, online: all/files/pdf/vietnam_country_report_2012.pdf, pp. 2-3. 123. Yonhap News Agency (2013), “S. Korea Ranks 21st on Food Security List in 2012”, online: 04/22/12/0501000000AEN20130422002400320F.HTML. 156 124. Kozo, Y. (2004), “Global Governance - In Pursuit of a New International Order”,What is Global Governance? NIRA International Forum. 125. YeonhapNews (2012),“Korea, Vietnam Celebrate 20 Years of DiplomaticTies”, online: english.yonhapnews.co.kr/0301000000AEN 126. Yul, S. (2012), “Middle Power‟ Like South Korea Can‟t Do Without Soft Power and Network Power”, online: ttps://www.globalasia.org: 45151/V7N3_Fall_2012/. 127. Zakaria, F. (2008), “The Post-American World”, W.W. Norton & Co., New York. 128. Zhao, Q., Liu, G. (2008), “Managing the China Challenge: Global Perspectives”, Routledge, Abingdon. Korean 129. 하영선, 이상우 (1992), “현대 국제정치학” (Chính trị học quốc tế hiện đại), 나남신서, pp. 214-235. 130. 한국 국립외교원(2012), 한국외교 전략 (Chiến lược ngoại giao Hàn Quốc), 연구원 총서 131. 윢영관(2002), “전홖기 국제정치경제와 핚국” (Hàn Quốc với kinh tế chính trị quốc tế trong giai đoạn chuyển đổi). 민음사. 132. 박인상 (2009), “베트남 진출기업 노무관리 안내” (Hướng dẫn quản lý lao động tại các doanh nghiệp đầu tư vào thị trường Việt Nam), 국제노동 협력원. 157 133. 유인선 (2006), “새로 쓴 베트남의 역사”(Lịch sử Việt Nam viết lại), 도서출판 이산. 134. 박재영 (2010), “국제정치 연구 패러다임” (Mô hình nghiên cứu chính trị quốc tế), 법문사. 135. 동남아 연구소 (2005), “동남아의 핚국에 대핚 인식” (Nhận thức về Hàn Quốc của các nước Đông Nam Á), 동남아 연구소 연구총서 06, 명인문화사. 136. 주성수 (2000)“글로벌 거번넌스 와 NGO”(Quản trị toàn cầu và NGO), 아르케. 137. 권윣,정인교,박인원 (2003), “ASEAN 경제통합의 확대와 핚국의 대응방향” (Sự mở rộng của khu vực ASEAN và phương hướng phù hợp của Hàn Quốc), 대외경제정책 연구원. 138. 권혁재, 김득갑, 구본관, 박현수(2013), “세계 통상질서의 재편: 3 대 FTA 의 부상” (Sự tái thiết của trật tự thương mại thế giới: 3 trục FTA), 삼성경제연구소, CEO information 제 895 호, 05 월. 2013, pp. 1-2. 139. 최영종, 김치욱, 박인휘(2011), “글로벌 거버넌스의 변화와 핚국의 외교전략” (Sự biến đổi của quản trị toàn cầu và chiến lược ngoại giao của Hàn Quốc), 핚국외교통상부 국제경제국, pp. 33-34. 158 140. 남복현(2011), “핚국과 베트남 국제 결혼을 통해 본 다문화가족의 이해 (Multicultural Families)” (Tìm hiểu về gia đình đa văn hóa th 남복현 ôg qua kết hôn giữa người Việt Nam và Hàn Quốc),장원출판사, pp. 228. 141. 핚국외교부(2012), 핚.아세안 개황 (Tình hình chung Hàn Quốc- ASEAN), 핚국외교통상부, pp 20-40 142. 양지선. 박동희(베트남 달랏대학교) (2012), “베트남의 핚국어 교육현황과 발전방향 제언” (Tình hình đào tạo tiếng Hàn tại Việt Nam và đề xuất phương hướng phát triển), 핚국어 교육 논총 23-3. 143. 핚국외교통상부(2011), 베트남 개황 (Tình hình chung của Việt Nam). 144. 마이클 T. 스나르 & 닐 스나르 (2006), “글로벌 이슈: 세계화의 도전과 대응”(Vấn đề nóng toàn cầu: Thách thức và ứng phó của toàn cầu hóa), 명인 문화사. 145. 심상준(Sim Sang Joon) (2009), 베트남 여성 지위와 핚-베 다문화 가정, 베트남학 연구총서(9)(the Position of Vietnamese women and the Korean-Vietnamese Multi-culture family. Vietnamese Studies the Ninth) (Vị trí của người phụ nữ Việt Nam và gia đình đa văn hóa Hàn – Việt), pp. 26-42. 159 146. 유인선(2012), “베트남과 그 이웃 중국: 양국관계의 어제와 오늘” (Việt Nam và nước láng giềng Trung Quốc: Quan hệ hai nước trong quá khứ và hiện tại), 서남동양학술총서, 창비.